Original Message
From: Zack Weinberg
Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38
Bernard Leak writes:
Can something be done to make the problem less obstructive?
It's not obvious that the script should try to be too clever and
work out which name to use. Mail looks as useful as any name
it can have
On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 10:14 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
Original Message
From: Zack Weinberg
Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38
Bernard Leak writes:
Can something be done to make the problem less obstructive?
It's not obvious that the script should try to be too clever and
work out which
Original Message
From: Daniel Berlin
Sent: 10 May 2005 14:07
On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 10:14 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
Original Message
From: Zack Weinberg
Sent: 09 May 2005 19:38
Bernard Leak writes:
Can something be done to make the problem less obstructive?
It's not
Bernard Leak wrote:
Firstly, thanks to Bob Proulx for the helpful pointer to the Debian
search widget. This is a genuinely useful-looking tool. How pleasing!
Not wanting to take credit inappropriately, it was Zack who suggested
the Debian package search page. I was the mailx history rant!
Dear List,
Jonathan Wakely wants me to send a patch (or more than one).
Send a patch.
Will do, after some further digging and sanity-testing, along the lines
I have already indicated. Did you expect it already? I have to
consider that not all builds of GCC are on UN*X-type boxes. The
existing
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 04:58:03PM +0100, Bernard Leak wrote:
Dear List,
Jonathan Wakely wants me to send a patch (or more than one).
:-)
Send a patch.
Will do, after some further digging and sanity-testing, along the lines
I have already indicated. Did you expect it already? I have to
References: 427E8378.1010309 at brenda-arkle dot demon dot co dot
uk873bsxbclc.fsf at codesourcery dot com20050508225133.GA2890 at
dementia dot proulx dot com87r7gh9tmq.fsf at codesourcery dot com
Apologies if this has lost its References field - it shouldn't have
done, but off-hand I can't
Bernard Leak wrote:
[in reply to why by default an MTA should be installed
in order to be able to send reports in the usual way]
Special system restrictions may make it
impracticable to install the expected tools, but this is really
a red herring.
Hmm...
Installing an MTA, whatever its size may
Georg Bauhaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Installing an MTA, whatever its size may be, has the potential
of introducing more work, more open ports, more firewall building,
more following the associated securitiy advisories absent a firewall
or not absent a firewall, more ...
Not at all. All
Bernard Leak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My system has developed, for hysterical reasons, as a minimal
installation of GNU/Linux on a P4. Minimal really was minimal - no
networking, no X... Everything else has been added on demand. I
managed to get my networking running with no problems
Zack Weinberg wrote:
All modern MTAs can be configured, quite easily, in a
'dumb client' mode where they accept mail only from the local host --
Well, easily is arguable if you aren't a Unix sysadmin, and
depending on the MTA...
There are even programs, such as sSMTP
which, not a month ago had
Zack Weinberg wrote:
The gcc test result script (via Mail) expects the /usr/sbin/sendmail
interface, but not Allman's implementation. You can install whatever
mail transport agent you prefer.
Again, not having an MTA installed indicates a monumental error in the
packaging or installation of
Matthew Woodcraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is at least one serious distribution which has considered having no
/usr/sbin/sendmail (or mailx) in a default installation:
http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2005-February/004207.html
What a horrible idea. It's not just about
Georg Bauhaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Good Thing, and improving. However, be sure to add a procedure
to your network monitoring setup to inform you of risky bugs in network
related software. And this is where work starts to be caused by
the assumption that e.g. a GCC shell script can send
Dear List,
apologies if this duplicates something, but *you*
try searching for
Mail in the mail archive...
To submit the output of a gcc test run to the relevant mailing list, I'm
enjoined
to run an obfuscated script and pipe the output to sh. Fine - but then
it tells me
Bernard Leak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
To submit the output of a gcc test run to the relevant mailing list,
I'm enjoined to run an obfuscated script and pipe the output to sh.
Fine - but then it tells me (actually, the docs said this already)
that I need the Mail program in my path. Not
Zack Weinberg wrote:
Bernard Leak [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Fine - but then it tells me (actually, the docs said this already)
that I need the Mail program in my path. Not wanting to be
obstructive or anything, but ... wot?
This program should have been included with your operating
17 matches
Mail list logo
